Adding money to the free space though at least gives you an opportunity to get back in the game. Admittedly, thatās how it extends the game, but the alternative is just the misery of slowly losing knowing that thereās nothing you can do.
If Iām going to invest 8+ hours into a board game though, Iād rather Axis and Allies or a war game though. Even 8 hours of The Campaign for North Africa would probably be a better use of time than ādoes 2d6 say you win?ā
As a family game - it makes sense to have that kind of āMario Partyā random bullshit that gives the worst player a chance to catch up. Sometimes the 6 year old deserves a break.
I broke Clue when I was 10 - I figured out that you could fish for a specific item, place or person if you guess two of them that youāre holding. If no one can show you that card, youāve confirmed the candlestick or whatever, and you also havenāt really revealed that much.
Most of the classic family games suck. Life, Chutes and Ladders, Candyland are all ārandom number says you win!ā Monopoly can get some life from being treated like a social/backstabbing game at least.
I broke Clue when I was 10 - I figured out that you could fish for a specific item, place or person if you guess two of them that youāre holding. If no one can show you that card, youāve confirmed the candlestick or whatever, and you also havenāt really revealed that much.
To me, it sounds like you just didnāt have anyone competent to play with. If everyone is using this strategy, theyāll also be able to narrow down which cards you have, giving them more information.
Yeah rubberbanding is great itās just that in a game where the goal is to control all of the money and money is the fundamental unit of gameplay and ability to continue it can only make the game worse.
The problem with monopoly is the non negotiable portion is the part that sucks and anything that improves or adds to the parts that can be fun does so by acting even more so on the part that sucks
Adding money to the free space though at least gives you an opportunity to get back in the game. Admittedly, thatās how it extends the game, but the alternative is just the misery of slowly losing knowing that thereās nothing you can do.
If Iām going to invest 8+ hours into a board game though, Iād rather Axis and Allies or a war game though. Even 8 hours of The Campaign for North Africa would probably be a better use of time than ādoes 2d6 say you win?ā
Which lengthens the game. Monopoly is best played as life; nasty, brutish, and short.
Given thatās the entire point of the game, that seems like it achieves the objective. Why would you want to extend that phase of the game?
As a family game - it makes sense to have that kind of āMario Partyā random bullshit that gives the worst player a chance to catch up. Sometimes the 6 year old deserves a break.
I broke Clue when I was 10 - I figured out that you could fish for a specific item, place or person if you guess two of them that youāre holding. If no one can show you that card, youāve confirmed the candlestick or whatever, and you also havenāt really revealed that much.
Most of the classic family games suck. Life, Chutes and Ladders, Candyland are all ārandom number says you win!ā Monopoly can get some life from being treated like a social/backstabbing game at least.
To me, it sounds like you just didnāt have anyone competent to play with. If everyone is using this strategy, theyāll also be able to narrow down which cards you have, giving them more information.
Yeah rubberbanding is great itās just that in a game where the goal is to control all of the money and money is the fundamental unit of gameplay and ability to continue it can only make the game worse.
The problem with monopoly is the non negotiable portion is the part that sucks and anything that improves or adds to the parts that can be fun does so by acting even more so on the part that sucks